

I don’t like to resort to that, but since you’ve suggested it - yeah, I’ll never hear about your concerns again. Thanks! Good job!


I don’t like to resort to that, but since you’ve suggested it - yeah, I’ll never hear about your concerns again. Thanks! Good job!


Please refer to my previous comment.


If you’re using Crowley to support what’s legitimate, you’re gonna have problems.


Pro tip: Posting in non-relevant places about the controversy you personally find very important - even if you’re right - is counterproductive to the very thing you want changed.


There’s lots of things that transport using HTTPS that aren’t websites in browsers.


This is related to China how?


Ideally, there should be a visitor card available to be used, with its clearances configured as appropriate for the visitor in question. Having a person hand over their own card (and PIN, if applicable) isn’t a great idea either, but it’s far better than copying that card, with or without permission (probably without, if we’re being honest).


That’s … not a legitimate use.
(quite literally) LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX LINUX


I believe that Pliny the Younger only took the name Pliny after his uncle died, in honor of him.
Oh, it’s not even that some other protocol is operating on 443. It’s that the underlying transport is HTTPS, just for something that’s not a website rendered in a browser by the client. Microsoft, for example, used RPC over HTTPS for Outlook connectivity to Exchange for a hot minute.